In short, Webb doesn’t grasp how thoroughly the Bible abolishes slavery.
He asserts that the Bible regulates slavery, and sets us on a path to abolishing it later on.
But he is misreading key texts, and forgetting the context of the narratives.
Israel DID abolish slavery. It didn’t exist in biblical Israel. There are no slave markets, no slave traders, no one being sold as a slave, anywhere in Israel.
These things were ubiquitous in the ancient world — but completely missing from Israel.
Webb misses this.
He asserts the OT commands better treatment of slaves. He misses the passages that abolish slavery entirely. He misses the passages that give all the power to the worker — not their “master.”
These are just a few of the ways. You’ll see more as we get into this deeper.
“There are no slave markets, no slave traders, no one being sold as a slave, anywhere in Israel.” Which archeologist or historian explicitly claims this?
The first bit of evidence is the biblical narratives themselves. When you read of life in biblical Israel, even in their darkest times, you don’t find any slave markets, any slave traders, or anyone being sold as a slave. It’s just not there.
That absence alone is enough to make you sit up and take notice. It’s the dog not barking. Why aren’t they there, if they were ubiquitous in the ancient world?
It’s not like the Bible is unaware of them. Joseph’s brothers sell him into slavery to a group of slave traders traveling through the lands that wound one day become Israel.
Yet once the land truly does become Israel, and they start following God’s laws, such things don’t happen anymore.
As far as archaeology goes, there is no archaeological evidence for slavery in Israel, as far as I’m aware. I’ve read through many of the earliest rabbinic interpretations of the passages I’ll be writing about, and they’re largely consistent with the point of view I’m articulating. Israel just was not a slave state, when everyone else was.
I hope this doesn’t come off as harsh or impolite, but an absence or lack of evidence is literally nothing. It has no weight whatsoever as evidence for or against the proposition. For example, if you have no evidence for the claim that I have a Rubik’s cube, that isn’t evidence that I don’t have a Rubik’s cube.
Also, the Bible does report examples of enslavement happening under Israelite jurisdiction, even if there is no commercialization of people as slaves present. In Joshua 9:23, Joshua curses the people of Gibeon to be woodcutters and water-drawers for doing something that (at least in their mind) they had to do in order to survive. Judges 1:27-33 mention the people of Canaan being subject to forced labor. 1 Kings 9:15-21 talks about Solomon drafting people into forced labor. So just broadly saying “Israel just was not a slave state” misses out on things.
No worries, my friend. You’re asking good questions.
In this case, an absence of evidence is vital. It’s the dog not barking.
I use that phrase because it indicates what we’re looking for — an absence of evidence that’s actually profound evidence.
Imagine a murder. The victim owned a ferocious dog who barks at anyone he doesn’t know. There’s a person who claims not to know the victim and claims to have never met him before — yet the dog doesn’t bark at them. Why? Because the dog knows them, proving they’re lying.
It’s the kind of evidence that you miss if you’re not looking for it. You don’t notice a dog not barking, because it’s not doing anything notable. You have to be looking for the thing that’s missing to see it. And when you do, it can break the case.
In this case, it’s incredibly notable that throughout all the archaeological digs in Israel, we’ve never uncovered a slave market.
In this case, it’s incredibly notable that none of the biblical narratives contain a slave market or slave traders or a slave class or people being sold as a slave.
If Israel was like the ancient world in which it lived, they should be everywhere. The fact that they aren’t is what blows this case wide open.
——-
You mentioned a few passages, all of which we’ll get to in the course of this book. But I’ll give you a quick teaser.
In Joshua 9:23, they aren’t sentenced to slavery. They get to live in their own homes. They aren’t owned by anyone. They get to pick their own civic leaders. They can come and go from their cities as they please. They have to give a bit of manual labor, essentially as tribute — the kind of thing a conquered city does to its conquerors, and yet it’s more gracious than that. Israel can’t lay a hand on them. Israel protects them. They get to live their own lives, for the most part.
Judges 1:27-33 are more of the same. Judges 9 fleshes it out a bit more, but it’s essentially the same. Putting a city to forced labor means that instead of them paying a tribute in gold every year, they pay a tribute in labor. They still retain their freedoms. They stay in their homes. They have their own families and businesses and marriages and lives. But instead of paying some gold annually, they pay a bit of labor.
1 Kings 9:15-21 is similar, but not as extensive. Solomon fought no wars. He didn’t draft people into military service. Instead, he drafted people into building projects. They had a bit of time on and a bit of time off. Essentially, this is like using soldiers to build bases and cities on deployment. These were Israelite citizens, not slaves.
You’ll notice that none of these passages talks about selling these people in slave markets, or selling them to slave traders. The people all keep right on living in their own homes. They pay labor as tribute — either as an individual citizen or as a town — but no one is being forced into slavery.
Hi Kyle, another good post on this important subject. And I appreciate your perspective on why this is needed today. God bless you in your work.
How will your project differ from William Webb's "Slaves, Women, and Homosexuals: Exploring the Hermeneutics of Cultural Analysis"?
Good question!
In short, Webb doesn’t grasp how thoroughly the Bible abolishes slavery.
He asserts that the Bible regulates slavery, and sets us on a path to abolishing it later on.
But he is misreading key texts, and forgetting the context of the narratives.
Israel DID abolish slavery. It didn’t exist in biblical Israel. There are no slave markets, no slave traders, no one being sold as a slave, anywhere in Israel.
These things were ubiquitous in the ancient world — but completely missing from Israel.
Webb misses this.
He asserts the OT commands better treatment of slaves. He misses the passages that abolish slavery entirely. He misses the passages that give all the power to the worker — not their “master.”
These are just a few of the ways. You’ll see more as we get into this deeper.
“There are no slave markets, no slave traders, no one being sold as a slave, anywhere in Israel.” Which archeologist or historian explicitly claims this?
Hello Coury,
Thanks for the question!
The first bit of evidence is the biblical narratives themselves. When you read of life in biblical Israel, even in their darkest times, you don’t find any slave markets, any slave traders, or anyone being sold as a slave. It’s just not there.
That absence alone is enough to make you sit up and take notice. It’s the dog not barking. Why aren’t they there, if they were ubiquitous in the ancient world?
It’s not like the Bible is unaware of them. Joseph’s brothers sell him into slavery to a group of slave traders traveling through the lands that wound one day become Israel.
Yet once the land truly does become Israel, and they start following God’s laws, such things don’t happen anymore.
As far as archaeology goes, there is no archaeological evidence for slavery in Israel, as far as I’m aware. I’ve read through many of the earliest rabbinic interpretations of the passages I’ll be writing about, and they’re largely consistent with the point of view I’m articulating. Israel just was not a slave state, when everyone else was.
I hope this doesn’t come off as harsh or impolite, but an absence or lack of evidence is literally nothing. It has no weight whatsoever as evidence for or against the proposition. For example, if you have no evidence for the claim that I have a Rubik’s cube, that isn’t evidence that I don’t have a Rubik’s cube.
Also, the Bible does report examples of enslavement happening under Israelite jurisdiction, even if there is no commercialization of people as slaves present. In Joshua 9:23, Joshua curses the people of Gibeon to be woodcutters and water-drawers for doing something that (at least in their mind) they had to do in order to survive. Judges 1:27-33 mention the people of Canaan being subject to forced labor. 1 Kings 9:15-21 talks about Solomon drafting people into forced labor. So just broadly saying “Israel just was not a slave state” misses out on things.
Hello Coury,
No worries, my friend. You’re asking good questions.
In this case, an absence of evidence is vital. It’s the dog not barking.
I use that phrase because it indicates what we’re looking for — an absence of evidence that’s actually profound evidence.
Imagine a murder. The victim owned a ferocious dog who barks at anyone he doesn’t know. There’s a person who claims not to know the victim and claims to have never met him before — yet the dog doesn’t bark at them. Why? Because the dog knows them, proving they’re lying.
It’s the kind of evidence that you miss if you’re not looking for it. You don’t notice a dog not barking, because it’s not doing anything notable. You have to be looking for the thing that’s missing to see it. And when you do, it can break the case.
In this case, it’s incredibly notable that throughout all the archaeological digs in Israel, we’ve never uncovered a slave market.
In this case, it’s incredibly notable that none of the biblical narratives contain a slave market or slave traders or a slave class or people being sold as a slave.
If Israel was like the ancient world in which it lived, they should be everywhere. The fact that they aren’t is what blows this case wide open.
——-
You mentioned a few passages, all of which we’ll get to in the course of this book. But I’ll give you a quick teaser.
In Joshua 9:23, they aren’t sentenced to slavery. They get to live in their own homes. They aren’t owned by anyone. They get to pick their own civic leaders. They can come and go from their cities as they please. They have to give a bit of manual labor, essentially as tribute — the kind of thing a conquered city does to its conquerors, and yet it’s more gracious than that. Israel can’t lay a hand on them. Israel protects them. They get to live their own lives, for the most part.
Judges 1:27-33 are more of the same. Judges 9 fleshes it out a bit more, but it’s essentially the same. Putting a city to forced labor means that instead of them paying a tribute in gold every year, they pay a tribute in labor. They still retain their freedoms. They stay in their homes. They have their own families and businesses and marriages and lives. But instead of paying some gold annually, they pay a bit of labor.
1 Kings 9:15-21 is similar, but not as extensive. Solomon fought no wars. He didn’t draft people into military service. Instead, he drafted people into building projects. They had a bit of time on and a bit of time off. Essentially, this is like using soldiers to build bases and cities on deployment. These were Israelite citizens, not slaves.
You’ll notice that none of these passages talks about selling these people in slave markets, or selling them to slave traders. The people all keep right on living in their own homes. They pay labor as tribute — either as an individual citizen or as a town — but no one is being forced into slavery.